Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Edward Glennon

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sandstein 17:20, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John Edward Glennon

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. If there were an article about the case, then this could redirect there. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:18, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 11:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 11:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 11:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 11:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Looks like a straightforward WP:BIO1E case. The only coverage of the subject that seems to exist is in the context of the Pollnow v. Glennon court case, and even then only dealing with the circumstances of that case. The bio details given in this WP article are basically unsourced, except for the birth/death dates from the Social Security Death index search. As the nom says, if an article about the Pollnow v. Glennon is created, the subject's name could be redirected there. Nsk92 (talk) 14:17, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree that this is a classic WP:BIO1E example. Certainly don't see significant independent coverage outside of that case. Papaursa (talk) 19:59, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.